A coup d'état (/ˌkuːdeɪˈtɑː/; French: blow of state; plural: coups d'état), also known as a coup, a putsch, or an overthrow, is the sudden deposition of a government, usually by a small group of the existing state establishment—typically the military—to depose the extant government and replace it with another body, civil or military. A coup d'état is considered successful when the usurpers establish their dominance. When the coup neither fails completely nor succeeds, a civil war is a likely consequence.
A coup d'état typically uses the extant government's power to assume political control of the country. In Coup d'État: A Practical Handbook, military historian Edward Luttwak states that "[a] coup consists of the infiltration of a small, but critical, segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder." The armed forces, whether military or paramilitary, are not a defining factor of a coup d'état. Lately a view that all coups are a danger to democracy and stability has been challenged by the notion of a "democratic coup d'état", which "respond to a popular uprising against an authoritarian or totalitarian regime and topple that regime for the limited purpose of holding the free and fair elections of civilian leaders."

Tao tricks the United States government into commiting an inter-dimensional atrocity and it is up to the Authority to prevent this from happening again, which sends shockwaves through the Wildstorm Universe.

The book is intended to be instructive and educational to readers interested in, among other things, the background of the Gambia National Army and current APRC government headed by President Yaya A. J. J. Jammeh since July 22nd 1994.

Substantial credible evidence points to a cover up by both elected and appointed officials. "Coup d'etat" explores the premise of Mafia involvement and answers the question, what if he lived. What if he exposed them?

Ukraine: US Orchestrated Coup d'etat
by Stephen Lendman
A previous article called Obama the latest in a long line of lawless US leaders. He exceeds the worst of his predecessors and then some.
His rap sheet is long and loathsome.

SOME STILL BURY
THE TRUTH ABOUT LBJ
By Roger
Stone March 2, 2014
That the Washington
Times would allow Hugh Aynesworth to review my book, The Man Who Killed
Kennedy – the Case Against LBJ, as if he is an unbiased observer is
disconcerting to say the least.
First a bit about Mr.
Aynesworth then a stout defense of the case that Lyndon Baines Johnson had
unique motive, means and opportunity to murder President John F. Kennedy and
credible fingerprint evidence, and that multiple eye-witness testimonies tie a
long time, proven LBJ hitman to the shooting from the Texas School Book
Depository.
Hugh Aynesworth has been
revealed by released government documents, to be a CIA media asset who in the
1960’s
coordinated with the Johnson White House and the FBI and the CIA in covering up
the JFK assassination.

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (left) and Fethullah Gülen. Photo: Hayatin Kendisi Burada/Picasa.
ANKARA – Last week, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan intensified his government’s response to the corruption investigations that have been roiling the country since December, restructuring the leadership of the judiciary and police.

In his foreword to 1979’s revised edition of Edward Luttwak’s Coup d’Etat: A Practical Handbook, Walter Laqueur describes the work as “the brilliant and original book of a then very young man.” A clear factor in the immediate and wide attention paid to the book upon its original publication in 1967, Laqueur notes, was the paucity of previous work on coups d’etat, and Luttwak’s “shocking” assertion that they could be carried out with relative ease by small groups of men if they’d only mastered some “elementary lessons of modern politics.” While, as Laqueur explains, “whole libraries have been written on the objective conditions in which revolutions take place, about civil and peasant wars, about revolutionary and internal war, about guerrilla activities and terrorism,” the unpredictability of coups vexes political scientists as much as politicians. “But even if coups are unpredictable,” wrote Laqueur, “they contain certain ever recurring patterns—‘the same always different’—from the time the conspiracy is first hatched to the actual seizure of power.” Ever since the Egyptian army seized power from Mohamed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood, no observer can have missed the seemingly semantic debates over whether the move was accurately deemed a coup. While there are legislatorial reasons for the debate on word choice, with continued American financial support of the Egyptian army contingent on there being no coup, the use or rejection of the term carries obvious political freight as well. Here Luttwak is particularly instructive. His “handbook” begins by setting out how the rise of...

[Ozan Varol is Assistant Professor of Law at Lewis & Clark Law School.]
Since the Egyptian military ousted President Mohamed Morsi, various commentators have pondered whether the military’s actions fit within the framework I described in an article titled The Democratic Coup d’Etat, published last summer in the Harvard International Law Journal (see here, here, here, here, and here). In this post, I will discuss whether Morsi’s ouster was a coup—the United States remains unwilling to use the magic word—and if so, whether it constitutes a “democratic coup.” I will conclude the post by analyzing why the Turkish government stands largely alone among foreign governments in its staunch and vocal opposition to Morsi’s ouster.
Was Morsi’s ouster a coup? The answer is yes.